This notion of modern fighters pullin high G's tryin to get on the six of an opponent is totally false. Actually that notion has always been false with fast jets to my understanding. Generally most WVR is by ambush with the other side not knowing they are under attack and the attackers taking a few shots then running for cover. A turning swirling fight is way too fluid to offer any predictable outcome and places men and machines in unnecessary danger. Dont get my wrong, "dogfights" happened and could still happen. But they are generally the exception and not the rule with post Vietnam Combat Jets. ANd even then it was the ROE and immature BVR weapons that forced close combat.

I respectfully beg to differ, thier is no way a "Manned" fighter can out manoeuver a missile if that missile can be given targeting information independant of the heading of the launch vehicle, as a last gasp save your ass type deal, off course the more manoeuverable teh better but its really goin to ba a one in a million shot if your crazy ass aerobatic stunt helps you evade a missile. But as I say this aint my field of expertise, so I wait to be corrected. :) Just as a side note what range is actually considered WVR?

ArtyEngineer, I wasn't arguing that a manned fighter could outmanoeuver a missile. Once it's locked, the manned fighter is more or less screwed. What I was saying is that a more manoeuverable aircraft could get into a firing position quicker. Taking the F-15 and AIM-9X as an example, yes, the 'winder does have practically 180 degree coverage, but its range against a target 75 degrees off the Eagle's boresight is very much reduced when compared to a targe 15 degrees off the Eagle's boresight. If the Eagle is able to point its nose towards the target BEFORE launching the missile, the weapon's range will be very considerably increased due to kinematic considerations. Hence why manoeuverablity, accelleration, and alpha handling are very important characteristics in WVR. WVR is generally considered to be 0 to 12-20km, though the lower figure is a better guideline.

WVR is also pretty fluid in the sense it can be assisted with basic magnification systems like those on the F-14. Boris summed the issue of firing parameters nicely. And in close, targets can zip in and out of your firing parameters. When you make a head to head pass imposed by ROE, you can't expect to fire as he passes by your port wing and get a hit. Those high G turns demand a lot of time/energy from the missiles, which have pretty short motor burn times. Making multiple turns is going to eat up energy once the motor burns out. And boris, I understand that the Rhino/Flanker/F-22's slow speed handling could be quite dangerous for a lightweight figther that gets overconfident. But I'd say that with more players involved, getting slower becomes more dangerous, and being bigger also puts a "shoot me" sign on you WVR. I remember hearing from a A-4 NFWS guy that whenever the Tomcats entered a turn, EVERYBODY in the "arena" knew exactly where that Tomcat was.

Honestly, advantages like that are harder for us to quantify/understand but I think they're just as, if not more important than technical details and aerobatic tricks. In the perspective of a OODA loop, for example, being smaller means the opponent takes longer to see you in a furball, which gives you more time to enter advantageous positions. Just my $0.02

Right, but low-speed handling combined with excellent T/W ratio (and thus accelleration and climb rate) is a deadly combination. Each fighter obviously has advantages and disadvantages, and the pilot has to play his cards right. In WVR, the Flanker driver's cards are a second pair of eyes, slow-speed/high-alpha handling, accelleration, climb rate, and combat persistence. He has the disadvantage of being much bigger, and having a heater that has a reduced acqusition capabiliy (though with a higher impulse motor reducing the off-boresight range handicap). Compared to the F-35, he also lacks the DIRS to see a thermal image all around. WVR is definately a toss of the coin, but a Flanker is a very dangerous opponent in such an environment, and it was implied in this thread that this was not the case.

I hear what you are saying, but I still believe the the "Supramanoeuvrability" (SP) demonstrated by various SU and MIG varients is overated with respects to actual WVR combat. It is only very limited and unlikely ROE's that would enable them to take advantage of such capabilities, which I suppose is another thread altogether.

AE is right! The Supermanuverability of the SU's is for air shows. Once your platform gets within certain levels of manuverability anything above is the margin of diminishing returns. So what if you can do a "Cobra" when a F/A-18E driver panning his neck can slot you by looking over his shoulder? All of the current 4th and 5th Generation types out there are so close in terms of manuverability that it doesnt matter much which can do this or that better. The only exception to this is possibly the F-22 which has a few options not available to the others due to its extreme performance. But look at the cost of that fighter and its numbers! All of that though is really moot though. You wont be winning air superiority these days if you are relying on or even regularly getting into WVR fights. Since 1991 to present the US/Coalition platforms have killed the enemy primarily from BVR often with the victim completely unaware. So many other factors come into play that WVR is going to be the result of chance and more often than not the winner will be determined by the side that notices that they are in WVR first! In these case smaller is better.

Just using the example you gave about the Rhino driver looking over his shoulder, a TVC Flanker could do a sommersault and launch an R-73 at much greater range than AIM-9X, or he could launch R-27T or R-77 to make things really interesting for the enemy aircraft. BVR might be the dominant factor in air to air, but when it comes to WVR, I can think of many examples where the supermanoeuverabiliy of the Rhino, MiGs/Sukhois/F-22s can be put to excellent use.

BVR might be the dominant factor in air to air, but when it comes to WVR, I can think of many examples where the supermanoeuverabiliy of the Rhino, MiGs/Sukhois/F-22s can be put to excellent use. Agreed BUT... ...if you are in a position where you have to rely on your WVR capabilities to carry the fight you are in a bad position. I'd much rather have a dominant BVR platform. Think of it like this. A soldier is qualified an expert with his pistol and rifle. Which is the more useful skill set in a modern conflict? Doesnt matter if he's packing a FN57 with insight laser/light combo ans SS190 ammo. Against a SKS armed insurgent the FN57 shooter is at a serious disadvantage until the fight gets close enough to allow for the use of his weapon which is unlikely. BTW Boris your acronymed name is like the Russian personel carrier I like to blast into oblivion!...;)